Paradox: The Limits Of Reason.

(ThyBlackMan.com) Reality is what we see, hear, taste and touch. And Science, the formal observation, recording and interpretation of what we experience, is all that we can know. Seems obvious, doesn’t it? Yes, but things were not always so. Today, though, after hundreds of years of living under the dogma called Reason, or Rationality, it seems obvious as the air we breathe.

Therefore, UFOS, spirituality, ghosts, mindreading and all other sorts of paranormal activity cannot be real. Again, all of that would seems to go without saying. However, though the layman seems quite confident in the logical, orderly nature of the world, things are not this tidy at all. For example, note the following.

Light has been shown to be both a particle and a wave. However, particles and waves are two contradictory concepts. The bedrock solidity of Euclidean Geometry has been brought into question because other geometries, like Reimannian Geometry, contradict the laws of Euclidean Geometry and yet are, within themselves, logically consistent. And it has been proven that any logical system, that is any system of reason based on a set of axioms, has to have some propositions that we believe to be true that cannot be proved based solely on its axioms. This means that no system of thought, ranging from arithmetic, to the human mind to the entire system of Science and Logic itself, can be proven valid.

The way Science, and the history of Science is taught, all of this is relegated to footnotes, if mentioned at all. However, the history of how Science was actually constructed, as opposed to a systematic listing of the finished propositions of Science, reveals the following.

Rene Descartes’ X and Y coordinate system which is the basis of calculus, the measuring tool of the sciences, was revealed to him one night in a dream. Isaac Newton practiced what today can only be called sorcery. He spent more time on alchemy than Chemistry and more time studying the ancient Egyptian and Hebrew texts than on “scientific” work. Norbert Weiner, the Father of Cybernetics, the study of communication in biological and communication systems, solved his most famous problem by examining the details of a dream of one of his subordinates. And Alan Turing, the Father of the Computer, launched his ground-breaking study by trying to determine if the spirit lives on after death and if the living can connect with departed spirits.

To put things in perspective, we have to go back to the beginning. Pythagoras, who had spent years studying in Egypt brought back this central idea to Greece, “numbers are things and things are numbers.” This is the germ of rationalism. It means that every observable thing can be measured with numbers and the manipulation of numbers leads to detailed understanding of things. However, the discovery of irrational numbers (implying the existence of irrational, or inexplicable phenomena) a century or so after his death, led to the disbanding of the Pythagorean school. However, Plato continued to develop the idea of pure rationalism even though its mathematical basis had been removed.

None can doubt that Science has enabled the West to create fantastic machines for transport, war and communication, and that with them the West has conquered the material world. But what we are disputing, in fact showing, is that we are not dealing with any ultimate, logical truths, but with a hodge-podge of catch-as-catch can “rationalizations” culled not from some substrata of inherent logic but from the very stuff, like dreams and mysticism, that science is said to repudiate.

And who can deny the dangers Science has unleashed: fossil fuel pollution, global warming, nuclear weapons and nuclear waste, just to name a few. However, the initial seed from which Science first sprouted was brought to Greece from Africa by Pythagoras. And so if we are to save Science, and if we are to save ourselves, we must go back to the Source, the African Source….

I don’t think Europeans forgot this way of thinking. They just don’t let it be known to anyone, but a few who really know the truth and use it to their advantage. This is also why we as a people are having the problems we’re having. Because we’ve gotten away from this way of thinking and follow the mainstreams, when as you said, we are the originators of it. The mental effects of slavery and colonialism are still in affect. But the solution does exist to our problems. Click on my name for more information.

Thank you, Dcarter910 and Marcus Vesey. I could not have said it better myself. Picking up on what you have said, “metaphysics” is that which is above and beyond the physical world of science. Western science ignores metaphysics, but Western science traces its own origins to a debate over metaphysics. The discussion we are having reopens that debate.

Yes, “1” is both the smallest natural number and also the totality. The individual is “1” and the uni-verse is one. To “be at one with the universe” is to recognize this fact.

Take for example, a circle, “O.” It represents a “hole” which is nothing, zero. But a circle has no beginning or end. Hence, it also represents “the whole.” Humanity must get back to this holistic view, otherwise we are doomed.

I like the concept of the article. The reality is that the scientific method is not design to know and understand the metaphysical. Because the scientific method is based upon what you can observe, or what is falsifiable based upon theory then we can immediately observe the limitations of science.

Because man is finite, observation is limited, and perception is arbitrary, then anything that may be “extra” human has no role in science.

This is a very deep article. It explains why “though knowledge is increasing, understanding is decreasing on what many may argue is at a direct inverse”. It goes to show why the most knowledgeable are not the most wise. And why the wise are more capable than the most unwise but knowledgeable.
If everything is equal to a number, and a number is derived from something that has value, then that means everything has a value. The dismissal of value to anything in existence means that your equation for “reality” is flawed. I will put in perspective to trains of thought.

1. Native Americans believed everything was “1”. They treated the earth and every living and none living thing as though it had the value of a human being or a value of “1”. Thus despite their population which numbered into the 10’s of millions they always remained in harmony with their surroundings. No animals became extinct and no environments where destroyed. Where everything has a value, everything combined has a value of “1”, so thus we are all one within this plain of reality.

2. Western train of thought assigns value and believes in the de-valuation or lack of value of things. Thus their equation for reality is not “1” and so the final outcome of all their endeavors is destruction and loss no matter how well intended. Example: The oil has value, but the land has no value so in the end the oil is extracted but the land is destroyed.

If I remember right, to the Egyptians numbers where not abstract ideas but represented the true interpretation of reality. Thus despite Western advances their mathematics is flawed and betrays the original laws of math an the interpretation of reality. Also means that any manipulation of reality based on this flawed logic, would lead to one or more inequitable or unintended consequences.

Dont even want to bring the spiritual implications of this concept forward!

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking... and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!